The Anti-Federalist Papers

The Federalist Papers

U.S. Congress

Saturday, September 08, 2012

Good evening, one and all, and welcome to another segment of Musings After Midnight. I am your congenial host, Anthony G. Martin, and I invite you to pull up a chair, have some tea or coffee, and relax. Let's discuss some issues, shall we?

As I stated earlier I have been tracking down some info with regard to the Democratic National Convention which was being held a couple of hours from here. I decided that the thing was too close by for me to pass up the opportunity to see if I could learn some of the behind-the-scenes scuttlebutt that always accompanies political conventions.

So, I did some digging, mainly incognito. I did not do my work officially as a journalist with credentials or anything like that. I wanted to be just a regular guy hanging around strategic places to see what came up.

And several interesting items came up, for sure.

I didn't even have to go into the convention area itself to discover these things. Of course, they would not have let me in anyway, given that I was not "credentialed" and did not present myself as a reporter. Large sections of Charlotte had been blocked off to the public anyway.

But, one thing is for sure, hanging around bars is a sure fire way to get information on a myriad of topics, especially if you happen to find one or two where people "in the know" like to visit. And sometimes the people who are "in the know" are not who you might think. These are the people who really know the inside scoop--vendors, for example, and janitorial services, and low-level volunteers. The more they knock down the brew, the looser their lips become.

Of course, the "biggie" that I already wrote about at the Examiner was the real story behind the change of venue for Obama's acceptance speech. I knew from the very time I first heard rumors of the change that it had nothing to do with the weather, although this was the official explanation of the DNC. Everyone in Charlotte knew it was a lie, including the local meteorologists.

The thing that surprised me, however, was the brazen attempt of the local media to spin it Obama's way in spite of the fact that the vast majority of local citizens knew it had nothing to do with the weather.

Nothing will ruin your credibility any more thoroughly than to try to spin a lie that everybody knows is a lie, yet you act as if it is the truth. Thus, the whole thing became a behind-the-scenes joke. The attempt of media outlets to claim that the venue was moved due to a mere 20% chance of storms was not only laughable, but pathetic. Most thinking people saw right through it.

But the other story surrounding the change of venue was the worry expressed by Obama operatives that their guy is not generating the interest or enthusiasm they expected. There was genuine distress and desperation. They even went 100 miles south in two or three different directions, into South Carolina, to attempt to get people to attend Obama's speech. They went directly south into Greenville, southeast into Columbia, and even westward into Western North Carolina to drum up support.

This was not even an issue four years ago. But this year the prospects for Obama speaking to a half empty stadium was a very real possibility, and everything had to be done to prevent it, even if it meant trumping up a false "weather warning" 32 hours in advance to do so.

To his credit, Scott Pelley at CBS News finally got around to telling the truth about the change of venue on Thursday evening when he went on the air at 10 p.m. to cover Obama's speech, and stated, "Not a drop of rain here."

Another item of note regarding the DNC is the fact that one got the distinct impression that attendees of the Convention were not like most people. They were certainly not like most residents of North and South Carolina. In fact, it was more like a freak show had come to town.

The Democrats brought with them the most extremist of the special interest groups. "Sluts who vote" was one signage a woman was seen wearing on her shoe. There were the typical lesbian, gay, and transgendered "couples" about...not that one never sees such things in this area but that one does not see such things in such high numbers.

And then there were the abortion-on-demand activists, who were in-your-face, demanding that their right to kill their babies is more important than the right to free speech. So woe be unto you if you merely express disagreement with them.

This is not to mention the anti-Catholic, anti-Jew, anti-God activists who resented any reference to Deity in the DNC platform but somehow grant a pass to fanatical Muslims. One began to wonder if some might attempt to burn down a few synagogues and churches while they were in town.

I must admit that watching the entire display puzzled me. None of these people, or very few, were like the vast majority of Americans. I wondered how DNC officials believed they could successfully make a case for their program for America when so few of them share the values, lifestyle, and beliefs of most Americans. They put on a good show. They sound as if they can relate. But in practice they portray a mindset that is diametrically opposite to that of the vast majority of citizens who go to work, raise their families, pay their taxes, pay their bills, go to church, pray, and believe in God.

This is what led one pundit to declare on national TV that the DNC this year was a "public relations disaster."

Then there were the protesters. And make no mistake about it, protesters were in abundance at this Convention. Local media outlets covered it even if the networks did not. The Occupy Movement was here. So were some very outspoken libertarian types, who merely asked reporters on camera, "Who is John Galt?" But these people were kept in an area far away from the Time Warner arena.

And then, finally, there was the sobering truth that some if not all of the Obama operatives have come to recognize. They are in real danger of losing this election. And there is some fear associated with it. Fear begets knee jerk reactions too.

But a part of the fear stems from a scenario in which Obama wins. That's right. Let that sink in a bit.

Part of the fear of Obama operatives involves a scenario where Obama wins, which some think will spur such a negative reaction among the populace that massive civil unrest, even violence, breaks out all across the land.

It is no secret that the Obama Administration has been monitoring citizens on social networking sites, blogs, and other such venues. It is also no secret that some citizens are so disgusted by this Administration that they insist that Obama be ousted by any means necessary. Thus, if he wins the election, some may initiate a civil war to oust him forcibly.

I am convinced that the Administration is fully aware that this sentiment exists out there. And I am further convinced that they are preparing for it.

All I can say is that after observing the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte his past week, I am more frightened than ever that we are about to witness the most dangerous period in U.S. history since the Civil War of the 1860s. These people are not merely talking about crushing a citizen insurgency. They are talking about limiting free speech, taking away guns, and in essence suspending ALL rights until they feel "the danger has passed."

But there is another danger lurking in the midst of all of this. Civil unrest may also ensue if Obama is defeated.

Let's not forget that there is a certain element in America that is 1000% invested in Obama's success, not because of the man but because of what he represents. And there IS a racial element to that, pure and simple.

If Obama loses, we may well be shocked to discover that an uprising of a different kind may ensue. Race wars. Riots. Looting. Cold blooded murder. All aimed at anyone and everyone who may be nothing more than suspected of opposing Obama.

Thus, I came away from this experience with more concern than I have ever had before about the future of the country. Make no mistake, Obama must go. He and the people surrounding him are a direct threat to the Republic and our Constitution. But getting rid of him may invite the ire of those committed to his success. Either way, we may be headed into a very troublesome danger zone.

So get set my friends. Gird up your loins. Do the right thing no matter what the consequence. We MUST insure our Constitution is restored to its rightful place as the final rule of law in the land.

The Obama administration, apparently by executive decree, has enacted new rules that make it easier for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to seize the guns of citizens without due process of law. A Washington Times report issued on Thursday provides the details.

Under normal circumstances a citizen must be convicted of a crime, or at least charged with a crime, in order for law enforcement to seize their firearms. But the Justice Department granted authority to the ATF to "seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled substance abuses."

According to the Times, this gives the federal government the power to seize the guns of citizens even if they are merely suspected of substance abuse. These citizens do not have to be officially charged or arrested.

One of the more intriguing stories flying under the radar at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C. this week is the fact that news reporters have been observed purchasing Obama merchandise, an act that is considered a donation to the campaign according to the law.

A vendor peddling the merchandise for the Obama campaign set up her table and goods in an area that is off limits to the general public and reserved for members of the press. The vendor told reporters that she was selling pro-Obama merchandise to the reporters and that most had purchased the goods using fictitious names in order to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest.

Reporters in the mainstream media have long insisted on their objectivity and neutrality in political matters in order to report the news in a fair and balanced manner...

Thursday, September 06, 2012

Wednesday this reporter and others as far away as London, England reported that the Democratic National Convention (DNC), which is meeting in Charlotte, N.C. this week, decided to move the venue for President Obama's acceptance speech this evening due to the projected lack of attendance.

However, one would never know this fact if one depended entirely upon the mainstream media, particularly local media outlets affiliated with the big three networks.

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

The Democratic National Convention announced Wednesday that President Obama's acceptance speech Thursday night will be moved from the Bank of America stadium to the smaller Time Warner arena.

DNC officials claim that the weather is the cause for the change of venue. A 20 percent chance of lightening and storms has been issued for Thursday evening.

Those in Charlotte who believe the DNC's public explanation for the change of venue stated that the president and his entourage are more concerned about the safety of those who attend the event than the specter of a capacity crowd in the 74,000-seat Bank of America stadium where Charlotte's NFL team, the Carolina Panthers, play football.

The vast majority of those contacted, however, are skeptical of the official explanation...

Tuesday, September 04, 2012

Jim Rogers, CEO of the Charlotte based Duke Energy, appeared on CNN Monday morning to discuss President Obama and the question as to whether or not a potential president should have CEO experience.

Rogers, who heads the largest energy company in the United States, gave President Obama high marks, stating that he took the reins of government at a very low point and made great strides in making the country more energy efficient through the development of natural gas.

But to some, Rogers' praise of Obama has a hollow ring, considering that Duke Energy pledged $32 million to the Democratic National Convention, which is meeting this week in Charlotte. Duke also provided an open line of credit to the DNC in the amount of $10 million.

Rogers himself serves as co-chair of the DNC host committee and is well known for his support for Obama and other Democrats.

Monday, September 03, 2012

The Democratic National Convention meets this week in Charlotte, N.C., a large Piedmont town on the border with South Carolina. The choice of Charlotte as the site for the Convention, however, has revealed some major obstacles the Democrats did not foresee.

When Charlotte was chosen little did the DNC know that North Carolina would later repudiate one of President Obama's major program initiatives. The state passed a law that clearly defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

North Carolina also has the dubious distinction of having an unemployment rate that is higher than the national average...